论文部分内容阅读
史传戴震纂修了《汾州府志》和《汾阳县志》,因为二志未署戴名,所以引发后人质疑,通过以二志内容及戴震纂修主张,与署名纂修人汾州知府孙和相所修的《中牟县志》内容相比较,参证北京大学收藏的戴震手稿中的修志稿件,证明二志确出戴震之手;并进一步通过戴震的论述和他与章学诚的讨论,归纳了戴震修志的五点主张。戴震手稿共23篇文章,包括有关《汾州府志》文章四篇,有关《汾阳县志》文章四篇,有关修志文章三篇,有关家乡歙县山水文章二篇,有关其他经典文章四篇、杂文六篇。胡适先生曾撰长篇跋文,予以考评。经过重新分析考证,对23篇文章是否戴震作品,及有关的问题和胡适先生的意见,做了新的评议及结论。确定23篇中绝大多数是戴震的作品,少数是戴震改定作品的原稿,只有段玉裁作黄烈妇庙碑一篇,完全与戴震无关。旧说戴震手稿是抄本有误,确实是戴震的稿本。
History Chuan Dai Zhen compilation of “Fenzhou Fu Zhi” and “Fenyang County Zhi”, because two volunteers did not wear the name, so provoke descendants questioned, through the second blog content and Dai Zhen compiling advocates, signed compilers Fenzhou Compared with the content of “Zhongmou County Zhi”, which the prefect Sun and Xiang renounced, it was confirmed that Zhi Zhi, who wrote Dai Zhi’s manuscript in Peking University’s collection of Dai Zhen’s manuscript, confirmed the hand of Dai Zhen; furthermore, through the discussion of Dai Zhen and his discussion with Zhang Xuecheng, Summarized Dai Zhenzhi five points. Dai Zhen manuscript a total of 23 articles, including the “Fenzhou Fu Zhi” four articles, “Fenyang County,” four articles, three articles about Chi articles, hometown Li County landscape article two, about four other classic articles , Essay six. Mr. Hu Shi had written a long post, to be assessed. After a re-analysis of textual criticism, 23 articles on whether Dai Zhen works, and related issues and Mr. Hu Shi’s comments made new comments and conclusions. Determine the vast majority of 23 articles is Dai Zhen’s works, a handful of Dai Zhen’s work is a modified version of the original manuscript, only Duan Yu curse Huang Lie Temple an article, totally irrelevant with Dai Zhen. Old Dai Zhen manuscript is a transcript is wrong, it is indeed a copy of Dai Zhen.